quazz: Remember it's an alpha. Heck, 1 month ago we still had placeholder GUI, which was 10x worse than it is now =) You wouldn't believe how much the game changed in only 1 month. Sure it sucks to quit a mission because you didn't knew how it worked, but you know, after playing the alpha for a couple of month, especially the last one, when everything changes everytime, you have nothing to get frustrated at =)

Heck, my lovely and carefully clothed mesmer suddently had pink hair and a weird ugly armor one morning... PINK HAIR! I was ready to freak out =)

Seriously, yeah, lots of missing features, especially in the instruction/tutorial/help department. The best way is to team up with an alpha or dev and let them help you, it's much easier that to discover everything by yourself.

My vote goes to Mortal Kombat: Annihilation!! While the first MK was a cool little movie, the sequel was just horrible! I still have nightmares and remember scenes that still gives me shivers... I was horribly scarred for life =)

I still play RS a lot, but since the release I'm nearly only playing COOP with friend, it's so much fun. While I played team adverserial a lot in the demo(well, I didn't had a choice, hehe), I only played 2-3 times since then, as COOP is 100x more fun for us. And, there are still lot of (competent) players, good servers, and hacks and cheats are MUCH less important than on team adv. servers. You get a stupid TKer sometimes, but usually it's fairly rare and quite enjoyable.

With everything I'm hearing about hacks and stuff, I think I'll stay with coop for now.

#5, Rogue Spear was developed by Redstorm. Raven Shield is developed by UbiSoft Montreal, with help from Redstorm. So that's why you see a lot of "french" names.

Well, considering RS had about 12 missions and around 8 multi maps, that's a whole new game with 8 + 3 missions and 8 new multi maps, and even 5(!!) new multi modes. Plus the usual weapons, etc. I'd say it's one big expansion worth about the same price as the original.

Now whether or not you consider RS to be priced correctly is another matter entirely =)

Let's hope it's really 8 new missions that doesn't have night/day counterparts...

Oberiko:

When we discussed PD back in the early days of SWG, we came to a conclusions: PD must not be a player-option or server-option, it must be PD all the way, or not. Compromises aren't good in this case, and usually go against the very thing they try to compromise. For example, having it as a option to the player will lead to one of 2 things: either it's not worth it and no one will play it, or it's too useful and people will play it, not because it's PD, but because it gives them an advantage, which is a wrong mindset for PD to work. A balanced ground will be impossible to get, and the only thing you'll achieve is devide the community in 2, with 2 different mechanics, which isn't a good thing IMHO.

Also, it defeats the idea that we must educate the players in playing with a PD mindset. If they can select between a PD server and a normal one, they might try PD, lose their char because they didn't play like it was PD(they aren't used to) and just go back to the normal server... the PD server won't be very crowded, and the cost of support probably will be too much for the amount of people it attracts. Then, all the time you took to build a PD system is lost, and you should just have built a normal MMORPG without PD.

You go all the way or you don't even try. There is no middle ground because it's not worth it for everyone involved(players, devs and publishers).

Lets go point by point Creston.

First, lag and tech difficulties must not be able to kill your character alone. That's true, and is the FIRST challenge of a PD setting. Like I said, don't think of it as EQ with PD, or D2 hardcore or anything like that. How to achieve that? Many ways, the one I prefer is having 3 states: alive, incapacitated and dead. You cannot go from Alive to Death in one shot(see below for exceptions). When you get to 0 HP or less, for example, you become incapacitated. Most monster AI will then switch to another opponent, letting you 'live'. When Incapacitated, you couldn't move, you might lose permanent HP and maybe XP or such, but you can still use 'mental' or specific skills, like certain healing skills/powers or such. If you are all alone(not a good thing to be), depending on the AI, he could just let you rot there, or 'bring' you to his camp to eat you, leaving you chances of being rescued or escaping yourself over time, etc. Very very few creatures could and would really kill you in combat, and those would be very dangerous to attack, and you usually know the risk when going against them. It now means that healers are really important in any party. As for other players instead of mobs, they get you to incapacitated, and they have a CHOICE of really killing you. If they do, they might lose things like alignment, morality, etc. They could get bigger bounties, ennemies, etc. Really killing someone would have consequences. This is just a simple system that illustrate how you could change how it currently works to make it work in PD. I'm sure you could come up with even better and more complex ideas. So, we got rid of lag kills for now, and other 'accidental deaths' that you have no control over.

Now, your points about losing your character after having work for SO long is not very good IMHO. I do think that the longest you play with a character, the LESS chance you have of losing it (lag asside if you want to refer to D2 Hardcore), for many reasons: your char is more powerful, you know how not to die since you're still alive for so long, etc. The early life of a character would be the most difficult part, and alliance and cooperation will play a very very important part in your 'survival'.

The goal is to have fairness when you lose a character. You must say and htink that it's fair. It must not be because of lag, etc. There should be very very few reasons to whine in the end, and ideally no reasons at all. If you take on a really powerful creature with the ability to really kill you, you must realize the consequences.

Now, you raise a good point. Monthly fees. We must do a MMORPG where losing a character doesn't make you lose the time you played. Maybe creating something like a lineage, or family, akin to a clan or guild. When you get to a certain level, you might create a lineage for example. It might cost XP and Gold maybe. Then, if you die, special 'insurance' agents try to recover your things and assets(automatically or player-based) and when you create a new characters, you can choose to be of the same lineage or familly, and 'claim' those assets. Also, it's not just a mechanic for dead character, it could promote roleplay and cooperations, and some perks. For example, you and your friends could play 2 brothers, and have some sort of advantages. You could play the game with a daughter, etc. Could be fun. Creatign a lineage could require you to find a lover, or just a prostitute for a bastad child, but this might be a bit much for most games =) So, while you lost your character, you still haven't lost everything, and you, or others, could benefit from this. Now, there are tons of things to think about, fix and examine, but that could be a way not to waste you monthly payments.

Also, maybe changing the payment modes to something different. PD might require something other than simple monthly payments, as it might not be the best way to handle it, like you explained. I don't have any proposal. Maybe pay per characters? I dunno.

Well, as for PKers, I think they will be less, socially speaking and gameplay-wise.

We start with a premise that I think is fair: PKers kill because they have the opportunity. The system let them do it, so why not? It's fun! There could be many 'classes' of PKers, but i think this premise is present for most of them, if not all. Some do it to feel more powerful, to harm others, etc, but this is secondary to the oppurtunity that is present.

Now, lets take Diablo for examples. PKers are eaither MUCH higher level than you, or close to you but BUILT for PKing. Normally, the player work hours to get his char high level, or 'perfect' enough, and then he is free to PK. Now, with PD, he might kill one character, and then die, or maybe he can kill 2, or 3, before dying. Now he must take once again hours to build another character, then kill maybe 2-3 persons. Also, maybe because of lineage, if it's 'account' based, he might be flagged as a serial killer, and his heirs too. Which would limit his activities. In D2, it's easy to start a new account. With a pay-to-play game, it's a bit harder to create a new account. Even more, like I said before, the character has the CHOICE of killing another. If you do chose to do it, it might take a certain delay where you are vulnerable. Think of it as diablerie in Vampire the Masquerade if you know that game, although it might be something like choping his head of, or his scalp, or performing magic, or something. So, trying to really kill someone might make you vulnerable, and could be killed while attempting to kill someone else, especially in a big fight. So, no more 'hit-and-run' PKilling. It takes much more involvement.

Fruthermore, socially-wise, people will band against PKers. Known PKers will be hunted down. They will not last long, and won't have an easy time finding a lone soul to PK easely. The system must also be made so that there aren't 'easy PK skills' like there are in D2.

Now, with all those difficulties, and the fact that it's pay-to-play and not free like D2, what would you do as a PKers? Isn't the opportunity much better in, say, another non-PD MMORPG? Is it worth it when it's a LOT easier in another game? Sure, some might stay, but I assume most will flock to other games. So, now, PKilling become more a roleplay and character trait than anything else: you want to play a serial killer or bounty hunter with all the consequences, which are many, fine. That's not PKilling for me.

In the end, like I said, you must really make a new game, you cannot build on top of the current crop of MMORPG, the game must be different to have PD. You can solve any problems, so instead of always just babbling about the perceived problems, why not trying to SOLVE them?

Ahh... but this is the problem with the society today, but oh well, that's another topic =)

I know PD and stuff is really far away, but I still hope the community will one day realize it could be so much more than the current bland MMORPG...

This comment was edited on May 9, 18:39.

Why would you lose it forever? I mean, with the proper infrastructure, loosing a character might become a bit rarer, and you'd play more carefully for a starter. No more trying to kill the mob double your level because he gives lots of XP and if you die, you just try again. Your character would truly matter and people would band together to be stronger, the community and in-game society would be strenghten and social anomalies that are now common place, such as PKillers, backstabbers, would become much much less present, and will become a character trait and not just a fun way for someone to pass the afternoon. The dynamic would be entirely different.

However, you must realize that you must build a Perma-Death game from the ground up with this idea, there must be no compromises. Everything must be planned accordingly, how combat works, how magic works, how the society works, the economics, character advancement, etc. Everything must be built from the fact it's Perma-Death.

Putting PD in a game like everquest or any other current MMORPG would be pretty stupid, unless and will fail, and would give the wrong impression that PD doesn't work, but I fear that this might happen and is also the view of most people (how could it work in Everquest? I don't want to lose my lvl 41 ranger!)

The problem is no one wants to take a chance and actually make a PD MMORPG. I don't know how the first MEO would have look. It might have been a big failure, I mean, first you must make a great game, but you have the additional challenge that it's PD. I'm not saying it's easy to make a PD MMORPG, heck, no one ever really tried, but I'm personally sure it would be worthwhile and take a big chunk of the market, because the game mechanics and dynamics will be so different, playing would be a lot more rewarding, for many reasons.

We had big arguments back in the days when SWGalaxies was announced. I was a big proponent of PD and we convinced a good part of the community before dev came in and said basically: we have the design doc done, approved by lucas arts, and it won't change, and PD isn't a feature.

Then, you have to wonder why SOOO many things changed during development... oh well. SWG would have make the perfect PD game, with advanced medical technologies, war between the rebels and imperials, laws and orders, bounty hunters(now, it would really mean something to be a BH), etc.

I wish someone had the balls to do at least try it. I mean, if it fails, it fails, fine. But at least try.

The problem with System Shock is that the IP (Intellectual Properties) are scattered around a lot of people and firms. Each investors in the now defunct Looking Glass got 'parts and bits' of the System Shock world, and many employes does too. It would take a major achievement to gather them together to make System Shock 3 unfortunately =(

Anyway, we have Deus Ex 2 and Half-Life 2 instead, which is, I think, a pretty good deal =)

Here's the announcement from Bethesda:

http://www.bethsoft.com/news/newsitem_363_1.html

It was announced yesterday or 2 days ago that Bethesda will publish Call of Cthulhu! Rejoice =) I also think the release date was pushed back to 2004, not sure about this last part tho.

(low volume) Silencer is used mostly on pistol, to contain the sound of infrequent firing. Since most pistols velocity is below the speed of soun, only the blast(the BANG) must be contained.

Sound Suppressor are used for faster firing weapons, since those generates so much energy fast that it would melt a normal silencer. Since the velocity of those guns are above the speed of sound, there are 2 sounds coming from the gun: the blast and the bullet hitting the barrier of sound. The sound suppressor must contain the blast by venting the muzzle blast and also slows down the bullet to subsonic speed.

Then you have Muzzle Suppressor that doesn't slows down the bullet but reduces only the muzzle blast and flash, not to give away your position, and since the bullet travels fast, the sound of the bullet is delayed, so a bit hard to acertain its position. They should have included muzzle suppressor to RS, it would be a good compromise.

Anyway, frankly, there is enough guns that are good used silenced that I find it quite useless to make every guns good suppressed. Anyway, you really only need SD in single/coop mostly, in multiplayer it's a bit less usefull.

You just need to find a good gun to use a suppressor. A suppressor usually slows down the bullet so that it becomes subsonic(under the speed of sound). Usually, SMG are the best value with suppressor, but some AR are good with a suppressor: m14, ak-47, fal and g3 are good.

The M4, for example, isn't good with a suppressor because the velocity of the bullet is what does most of the damage(piercing damage), so to put a suppressor, that slows down the bullet to subsonic speed, you end up doing not much damage.

Every gun with small caliber that has an high velocity just sucks with a suppressor. AK and M14 are good suppressed, because they have a big bullet and most of the damage comes from the punch of the bullet and not its velocity, so slowing down the bullet doesn't reduce damage that much.

That's why also that the UMP is good suppressed, because it's a big bullet that doesn't travel much faster than the speed of sound (.45)

Same thing applies for range.

So it's pretty realistic in many ways. Sure it's probably balanced a bit, but not much, most of it is quite realistic.

Craw: I think you showed exactly why many people are resentful of americans. It's nice to be patriotist and proud of your country, but there is a line to cross I think, and too many americans cross it. It's not about who's stronger or who's better, it's about who you are. I mean, if you want to talk about historic happening, why does the US allies with Britain? Shouldn't you hate each other for lives? You should protest against the US/Britain alliance, really.

Anyway, you think France wants cheap oil and that's why they oppose the US? Probably, yes. So is the US. Do you SERIOUSLY think the US is a saint in here and wants to attack Iraq to get rid of a dictator and his weapon of mass destruction for the greater good of Humanity? Whether or not Saddam has Weapon of Mass Destruction doesn't mean anything here, the US don't even care. They want the oil too, and badly even, and contrary to France, they have the army to take over Iraq, so sure, they want to attack them for the oil. The difference is that France isn't strong enough to flex his muscle, so they want to do it the peaceful way. Everyone has an agenda. Saddam has incredibly high debts to Russia, so that's probably why Russia backs France, they want to be repaid (probably with oil) before Saddam goes out.

Everyone wants the oil. It's simple. They'll say anything but that, but it still all comes down to the oil.

Well, except for our great prime minister here in canada who day after day contradict himself and his minister of defence. One day we're with the US, the next against, and some day we don't even know. Talk about focused politics from our beloved Jean Chretien =)

Some corrections/rants here.

1) Games booting from CD: Well, dunno what's all the "seek time will kill it" and "it's going to be too slow" stuff is about. I mean, have you ever heard of consoles? You know, before the X-Box a HD was a pretty rare sight for a console, and you still were playing quite fast. It's just that PC games are built with the fact you have a HD. Games booting from the CD will have to be built differently, no big deal. Having that said... what's the point? Nearly everyone has Windows, so there is no point for them to use that. Linux fanatics without Windows will not want to play them because it's still windows loaded from the CD. So it doesn't really profit anybody, except maybe a small % of people. Oh, and the size... Well, put 2-3 CDs. I mean, you're used to change CDs while playing some big games, right? What's the difference?

2) Well, about DirectX and all, devs are either lazy, strongly suggested to use or used to develop with DirectX. DirectX isn't nice or beautiful and it doesn't solve a lot of problems. It only gives a 'standard' API. Yo can still do crappy things with DirectX, and it only speed up development if you are used to develop in DX. You still have the same amount of things to learn if you never programmed with DX(learn DInput, DPlay, DSound, D3D, which are all different) There are nearly always an alternative for DX, and if people would put more effort into it, we would get rid of DX dependancy. DX is good for some application, but people seems to be forced to develop in DX and some people shouldn't be developing in DX but are. DX is a good thing in a technical perspective, but not on the practical side. It's still getting better, which is a Good Thing, but I still find it a mess to program with. We usually use OpenGL for graphics, OpenAL for sound, our own network/input code, and I'm testing SDL right now to see how it handles inputs and such.

3) Common matchmaking/network/patch code. It's a nice idea, really. However, the way MS will implement it, it will be futile. What they need to do is create a common open protocol, in the sense that the specifications are public. Then, build a reference library to use this protocol, which is free for developper or lisenced with the source code. Then developers use a (slighlty or heavily) modified version of the reference implementation for their games, using the same protocol as everyone, and nearly the same code. It's the right way to do it. Right now, what MS will do, is put a gun to the head of everyone. If something fails, or doesn't work correctly, MS will be the only one able to fix it. Same problem as DX at its core. The burden is passed on to MS. I don't see it as a good thing at all, same practical problems as DX as a whole: it's not the 'best' way to do it, and devs cannot change anything, they must do it from scratch on their own or use DX which might have better alternative for their specific needs. An not that great analogy would be MS providing a 'standard' frame for Cars, which is sent to Ford, GM, Honda, etc. Every car makers will have the same 'MS Frame', but they can put all the pieces, transmission, motor, etc, they want. However, they are limited by the frame, and cannot even change the frame, so they must all remake their parts to match the frame. Also, you have the limitation of the frame for the space, speed, aerodynamics, etc. So all the sedan, sports car, SUV, etc, will have the same Frame... The question is then, why should Ford and all use the 'MS Frame'? I dunno. They don't save a lot of time to build their cars because they have to build and change the parts to fit the frame. It's the same mystery as DX for me, why oh why?

4) DRM. Digital Restriction Management. Only MS or XXX(insert your favorite monopoly here) approved apps will be able to run. I won't even start a discussion here. DRM as a whole is an abberation, used to strengthen MS and co's(RIAA, MPAA, etc) positions. Some part of DRM is a great idea(encrypted mail and documents and such directly in the OS), but most part are worse than hell. There must be a controlling, impartial and public entity overseeing DRM, not the companies that have a lot to gain by pushing it.

So, all in al, Longhorn is just the next version of DirectX, with the OS probably using Direct3D for it's GUI and kicking out GDI and the god aweful win32 API for windows graphics(which is a GOOD THING!). Nothing really ground breaking here.

If they make the error of putting the patch/matchmaking/etc thing Longhorn only and not in DirectX... it will be the worst thing ever. Just picture it. However, it fits perfectly with their : upgrade or die plan of late.

As an OS maker, MS should only stick with protocols and specifications, giving actual pure API, not a coding platform restriction. There are hundreds of way for MS to help the dev community and all, however, money is their concern and they won't even bother cheking most of them, even less trying.

That was long =)

-Karhgath

"The biggest annoyances are those few quests where you have to get an NPC and then WALK with them halfway across the continent..."

I hated those quests as well.. And I got lost easily so those quests usually lasted a long long time.

Well, that's exactly how NOT to play morrowind. Just don't do those quests, simple. You won't miss out experience due to the way the system works, so you are not "forced" to do it like most linear RPGs. If someone talked to you on the street and asked you to drive them to the other side of the city, would you do it? Maybe if you have nothing to do, you don't mind and you're in a good mood. Or maybe you'll just say "feek off"! Same in morrowind. Always ask you this: would my character do this? Is he good, is he evil, is he ... ? That's the right way to play morrowind!

Ok, I'll shut up know =) It's just sad you're missing all the enjoyement the game gives when you play it right, that's how it should be played!

Like I said, you must play the game differently. Playing Morrowind like any normal RPG and doing 'everything' and getting every single item is... dull and will quickly get boring, as you saw. The goal in morrowind is not to win or get more powerful(unless that's really what you want), the goal is to play the character you like and want.

You must decide how you will play morrowind with each character, setting goals, things you'll do, thing you won't.

I've played many character, all different, all having different gameplay and all finding different things in the world. Morrowind is HUGE. I still haven't explored it fully and I got it when it came out.

For example, I played a Tomb Raider, kind of thief/adventurer, not a basher at all, with minimal magic. My goal was to get inside tombs, walk past the minions and loot it, them coming back home and stash the loot. I couldn't use most of the stuff I got, but it was a LOT of fun.

I played an imperial, real piece of crap, always abusing and taunting people because he was The Law. Became the Imperial Dragon something, which is the imperial leader in Morrowind. At the end, I had to bribe silt strider drivers because I taunted them to much before and my reputation was crap, I was seen as a dickhead by nearly everyone except imperials. But hell, that was fun fun fun!

Played a monk, no weapons or armor, just his hands. He didn't liked to fight, prefering to flee, a pacifist. Joined the Temple and the Imperial Cult, advanced in both, had lots of fun healing and helping people wherever I went. I sometimes had no choice but to fight, and it was really fun and interresting battle with all the defensive magic I had, hehe. It was taking a lot of time to level also, which was fun, cause it wasn't the goal at all.

As you can see, these 3 didn't even undertook the main quest. Only 2 of my character undertook the main quest, and only one finished it, the other decided it wasn't his thing and wanted to be a good, killed Vivec and terrorized the city, hehe. That was my evil telvanni mage, I had my tower with crypts and monsters under it, with dwarven construct protecting it, it was great.

I also played a thief, and assassin, a mercenary, and many other, each with his own personality and quirks. All of them was really fun. Some didn't like some type of armor(even if it was the best one) or other item, some only did good deeds, some only betray and wanted power, some money, etc.

You just need to play Morrowind totally diffently than any other RPG out there. If you play the "finish the main quest, get the best item and level up" game, you'll get bored pretty quickly.

Like I said, if you play and don't like osmething... well, STOP doing it. If you find the main quest lame, or don't care about it much, don't play it, find something else to do, simple as that.

Anyway... I know I won't convince anyone, but try it again for those who found it boring, you might be pleasantly surprised.

Sure there are a LOT of flaws with morrowind, but there is nothing that can prevent you having fun, well, except yourself =)

Well, you were once like a friend of mine, who didn't like Morrowind much, saying it was boring, no NPC interaction, but I convinced him to play the game differently. You have to dictate your style play yourself. The game is totally open, so trying to do everything, like in usual RPGs, will get you bored pretty quickly. You must dictate yourself how you play the game, how to have fun. It's probably the most rewarding game for roleplaying yourself. The 'end' was only anticlimatic if you didn't cared about it, if it didn't mattered to you. If that was the case, then, why!, oh why! were you following that path? I played countless of games where I didn't even cared about the main storyline and had helluva of fun by following countless of other paths. As a matter of fact, I only followed the main quest with one character, of about 10-15 total, all completely different.

It's just a matter of approaching the game. You have to play it differently, or else you'll get bored. My friend is now totally hooked to Morrowind, hehe.

As for the milking it part, well, they had TONS of feedback on being werewolves, since you could only become vampires, so they devoted a totally new expansion for that, also creating a new region, new quests, new mechanics, having a totally new focus(a new mining village in development) is pretty much a case for expansion. As a matter of fact, people always forget that most of the work in a game is not coding the engine, it's designing the game, making the arts, the levels, and so on. That part is much more important than just the engine, so I disagree with the "easy way out" argument everytime an expansion gets out for a game. It's not like it's as easy as adding one file. I mean, if that was the case, where are the fully featured mods that adds totally new areas and concepts and everything?

I agree tho about the surface culling... it kinda sucks. Well, it's their first fully modern 3D engine and I think they did a great job on it. There just aren't many Carmacks in this world!